About your Search

20130318
20130326
SHOW
Cavuto 5
( more )
STATION
MSNBCW 47
CSPAN 25
CNNW 15
CSPAN2 15
FBC 14
CURRENT 10
KGO (ABC) 8
KQED (PBS) 7
CNBC 5
KRCB (PBS) 5
KNTV (NBC) 3
KCSM (PBS) 2
KTVU (FOX) 2
KQEH (PBS) 1
LANGUAGE
English 207
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 207 (some duplicates have been removed)
for two minutes. ms. castor: democrats and republicans agree that deficit reduction is important. in fact, over the past year and a half we have achieved over $2.7 trillion in debt reduction. now the republicans want to take us through a charade with this tea party budget. if enacted, the republican budget would weaken america's recovery. it would undermine what makes america great and what makes america strong. like education, the ability of students to attend college, medical research and inthe noah vation, the about of -- ability of our older neighbors to live their lives in dignity in their retirement years through medicare and long-term care. now we get a lot of advice and economists across the board, in fact, our own congressional budget office, advise that the best and fastest way to reduce the deficit to is to make sure people across america have jobs and are working. it is inexplicable that the republican budget proposes to eliminate jobs in construction, in education, scientific research, and instead heaps the burden on middle class families. experts predict the republican budge
. this is something that every family in america is asking us to focus on. number two, we need to tackle our deficit and debt fairly and responsibly. as democrats, we understand that is a responsibility that we bear today and we do it in this budget. and number three, we need to keep the promises we made as a nation to our seniors and our families and our communities. many who have struggled so much over the last few years and are counting on us to be there for them again now. mr. president, we'll be hearing a lot more about all these principles today and we're going to discuss the stark contrast between the budget that is expected to move in the house of representatives today and the plan and path forward that we have put forward here in the senate as democrats. mr. president, i will yield to senator sessions for his opening remarks, and we will continue this debate throughout the day. mr. sessions: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from alabama. mr. sessions: i thank the chair and would express my appreciation to senator murray for her leadership and who are courtesy and her skill
2011 budget specifically targeted federal grants for first responders as a way of cutting the deficit. >> he's taking advantage of a sad fact in this country. if you live in illinois in a part of chicago that is fluent, even the gun violence taking place in chicago, in your very city, doesn't impact you. so you may not think that urban crime is a reason to change gun control laws, because it doesn't affect you personally. you can literally live away from where people are kill and not have gun violence affect you. and gun control laws wouldn't get at that crime. maybe the trafficking piece, it's a much more complicated issue. wayne lapierre is taking advantage of that. to your point, it's not as if congress is trying to do anything about that. not trying to do the things they could do about urban crime. >> mental health, a lot of that is aided by the affordable care act. and governor, joy makes a good point. if you look at support for stricter gun laws among african-americans, 78% of them support stronger controls, compared with 48% of caucasians, support for stricter gun laws among ur
and leave a nearly $6 trillion hole in the deficit that would lead to tax increases for middle-income families. that isn't balance. that is total imbalance. at the same time, republicans propose cutting $3.3 trillion from programs for people with low and moderate incomes, including hundreds of billions of dollars for food nutrition and medicaid programs. so i want to end by asking the republicans when they come and talk about their tax proposals to name a specific that they would address. it's not in the republican budget. name one, name two, name three. otherwise, it's worse than empty. the chair: the time of the gentleman has expired. the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. ryan: with that, mr. chairman, i yield three members to the gentleman from indiana, r. rokita. mr. rokita: i thank chairman ryan in bringing this budget to the floor. i rise in high support of it. i also am very proud, one of the highest honors i have had in my short time here to serve on this committee. not because of chairman ryan only, but because of the members. by members, i mean republican and democrat mem
to work, taking a shared responsibility approach to our long-term deficits so we bring them down in a balanced smart way and they rejected the idea that we're going to move the economy forward by giving windfall tax cuts to the very wealthiest in the country and the benefits of that would trickle down and lift everybody up. they rejected that lopsided approach that balance the budgets on the backs of everybody but the folks at the very top. balance the budget on the backs of our kids' education by slashing important investments. in that category of spending we make these important investments for our country and our future, they double the cut from the sequester. so those are our investments in our kids' education. those are our investments in science and research to help power our economy. those are our investments to help modernize our infrastructure. they cut transportation by 15% when we have 15% unemployment in the construction industry. so mr. chairman, the american people rejected the kind of uncompromising lopsided approach that we see once again presented here in the hou
nation that does not -- is not riddled with debt and deficit, but also a nation that continues to be the economic leader in the world. and i believe our plan makes -- protects those investments in those key components of growth. and i hope over the coming hours that we will go through this debate and -- and i know we'll have a spirited period of a lot of amendments. this -- this budget i believe will pass and it will have to then find agreement with our colleagues in the house. and i just want to again commend both the chair and, for that matter, the ranking member. at the end of the day, we have to find common agreement to get this done. this issue that hovers all over of our other debates has become a metaphor as to whether our institutions can if you please in the 2 1*9 century. so just as the chair and rank member found agreement through a markup process where both sides were heard and amendments were offered and debated in a fair and open process, i want to both thank the chair and rank member for their commitment. they have different idead about how we get there, but at t
and better jobs for the american people. after all the budgets that never balance and record deficits, job creation, we would be coming off the four best years in modmodern american history, because we had four $1 trillion deficits in a row. another that will, quote, only be $850 billion this year. that's yielded us less than 2% growth a year. we all know if we took the number of americans that have left the work force and recalculated unemployment rate, it wouldn't be 7.8%, it would be about 10.5%. the path that my friends on the other side recommend doesn't work. and the balance in both the r.s.c. budget and ryan budget are much more promising course. they achieve that balance by not raising taxes, while not raising taxes. i think that's very important, too. we certainly aren't undertaxed in this country. my friends on the other side clearly believe that we are. they are going to offer multiple tax increases in all their budgets. i like the budget that does not require tax increases. finally, both these budgets, the republican study committee budget and the republican budget, come to gri
budget. they now claim their budget would eliminate the deficit in 2023. and house budget committee chairman paul ryan has even said that it doesn't really matter how their budget eliminates the deficit. mr. president, americans across our country who will feel the impact of the choices we make in the coming weeks and months feel that it does matter. so while some of my republican colleagues would probably prefer not to hear about it, i think that the impact of the house republican budget is a crucial part of this debate, and we owe it to the american people to put our opinions on the record. now we've come a long way, mr. president, but there are still far too many americans today who are unemployed or underemployed, which is why our senate budget's first priority is boosting our economic recovery. speaker boehner has actually agreed with president obama that our debt does not present -- quote -- "an immediate crisis." so you might think the house budget would phase in cuts responsibly so we can protect our fragile recovery. well, instead the house republican budget would do seriou
differences. let's take a look at them. the gop plan would cut the deficit $4.6 trillion over ten years, all through spending cuts. the democratic plan would cut the deficit $1.8 trillion half through spending cuts and half through tax hikes. senator corker, let me start with you will senate republicans accept a tax increase if you get serious entitlement reform and cuts? >> i think senate republicans and all republicans want to see a 75 year solution to entitlements and i think republicans are joined in wanting to see tax reform so to the extent that generates revenues and how that is scored obviously that will be debated as we move ahead but i think all of us understand the real issues driving the deficit is in our o country are the entitlements. we want to see these available for generations to come. >> chris: but real quickly you you understand the price for entitlement reform in any deal would be a tax increase. would you buy that and what do you think are the prospects there willle be a deal sometime before this summer? >> well, again, i think there by the way is a chance on a deal. i
a jobs deficit. we have a budget deficit. and these are the byproducts of a leadership deficit. we still have no budget from the president, in violation of the law. he gets his ncaa bracket in on time but still no budget. this is the fourth time in five years. he set a new record this year, two months with no plan, while we had trillion-dollar deficits and a debt crisis on the horizon. his party leaders, unfortunately, failing offering a serious account of our challenge. no serious plan to grow our economy or create jobs. no plan to ever balance the budget. take more. trillions of dollars more to spend more in washington. that's what got us in this mess in the first place. so what can be done? the good news is that we now have a vehicle for regular order. the democrats derailed the budget process each of the last few years and stopped governing when they stopped budgeting. at least we now have a budget process that's moving. we brought them back in the game this spring. that's a good thing. so what's going to happen in the weeks ahead? well, we will make the case for our priorities. whet
our first order of business will be to get our deficits and debt under control. >> then just this week, a different tone. he said we don't have an immediate crisis in terms of debt. in fact, the next ten years it's going to be a sustainable place." congressman van hollen, why the change? >> it's not a change. they're totally consistent. right now our big problem is to sustain the economic recovery. we've seen momentum in the job market. and the last thing we want to do right now is to put the brakes on that. in fact, one-half of this year's deficit is due to unemployment, the fact that more people aren't at work. so what the president saying our focus right now should be to get people back to work, sustain the recovery, and then reduce the deficit in a measured, balanced way. there's no doubt that we have to do it and the budgets the president will present and the ones we will present will do that. it will put us on a sustained downward trajectory on deficits. but our priority is job growth. >> this is the point, right? his argument is don't get us in the middle of austerity in the nex
these problems that happened. host: we'll leave it there. guest: republicans were hitting deficit spending that the budget that the cr isn't addressing the deficit problem. you put two words on a credit card and didn't pay for them and that's why we have deficit. the war funding is an interesting element. it was a fight between democrats and republicans. democrats cut spending. how they arrived at savings in their bument and republicans said those numbers aren't realistic. host: trnt republicans say thrg have been increases in spending by the obama administration at pushed the debt from five or six years ago guest: how much debt there was when president obama came to office and how much debt there is now. that is the consistent argument it's getting worse. when you compare the ryan budget to the senate democrats budget there is a different pace of spending, both of them increase spending over time but the democrats by a lot more. host: go ahead bob. caller: we won't really know what's in this thing until the cover is pulled off. we can't trust the media to tell us the truth. and you should
deficits with no end in sight doesn't lead to prosperity, doesn't lead to growth. it leads to financial ruin. i'm also the father of four great kids, two in college and two in high school. they know that as a family they have to plan ahead for the future. we need to create a budget and then live within our means. these are the same principles that my parents past down to me. -- passed down to me. these are the values that montana's families live by each and every day. those values are exemplified in montana's own state legislature. we're the only constitutionally -- where the only constitutionally required duletty is passing a budget. in -- duty is passing a budget. in fact, when they adjourn in a little over a montana, they will have given montana a balanced budget, just like they did last year and the year before and the year before that. it seems simple -- live within your means, spend no more than you take in, but it's not so easy here in washington. right now we are presented with two very different visions for our country, two visions that will lead to two very different outcomes
level. secondarily, if you say deficit reduction, the partisan are leeched out. we are talking about whether it will work to balance the budget. if along the way 35 million become uninsured, that's sad but we don't talk about it because cbo didn't mention it in the score. that's the great trick of paul ryan to recognize if you only talk about budget deficit, where does your budget put the deficit 20, 30 years from now, the amount of things you sneak in under that cloak that you can never put into the conversation in a serious way in normal times is tremendous. that's the central political innovation of his career. >> the favorite thing in the accounting discussion is compare the government to a family, saying you couldn't -- well, families do run debt, they cannot afford to buy their houses for cash, so they have a thing called a mortgage, which is the national debt of the family in effect. they try to oversimplify everything in this, but is there some break through in this point of republicans saying you know what, the debt isn't such a serious problem? >> there's no break through.
deficit by almost $6 trillion in 10 years. reduce ay budget would little under $2 trillion in 10 years. >> what other groups are offering their own budget plan docks water they likely to focus on? >> -- who will be issuing their own budget plans? budget will be similar to patty murray's budget in the senate. increases,ave tax but neither would balance the budget in 10 years. also the congressional black caucus and the congressional progressive caucus will be introducing budget. it's possible a ryan version could be introduced in the senate. >> what is likely to happen in the senate this week? >> it will be democrats making the case for the patty murray budget. convince someto democratic senators who may not support that budget. they will have to sell it to democratic senators as well as republicans. no republicans are likely to vote for the budget. they will be calling for more spending cuts, no tax increases, balancing the budget sooner. >> republicans say this to be the first time in four years they have agreed to put forward a plan. why is this your difference? are a number of diffe
through a state where wisconsin had faced a multibillion dollar budget deficit, we were having double-digit tax increases, and we saw some of the record job loss that we've seen in the past. so what did we do? we came in and took that deficit, $3.6 billion, and today it's nearly half a billion dollar surplus. we took up -- [applause] we took a state where taxes had gone up, and we not only lowered the overall tax burden for the first time in years, property taxes on a median value home had gone town in each of the last two years. [applause] and when it comes, and when it comes to jobs under my predecessor's term, wisconsin had lost 133,000 jobs, and back in 2010 a survey showed just 10% of our employers thought we were headed in the right direction. today we're gaining jobs and 93% of our employers say wisconsin is heading in the right direction. we can lead with an optimistic message. [applause] simply put, we showed in our election that when people realized the debate was between who do you want in charge, the big government special interests n this case the employee unions, or do y
reduce unemployment to nearly five -- two near 5% and three years. it would reduce the deficit by $4.4 trillion over 10 years. and it would strengthen medicare and medicaid amah and you'd be asking the wealthy to pay their fair share. -- medicare and medicaid and you would be asking the wealthy to pay their fair share. guest: the institute of policy analysis estimated that you are spending money on infrastructure. we have a to point to dollar trillion infrastructure deficit, according to the transportation -- american society of civil engineers. building roads, highways, bridges, etc. you put people to work building schools and other necessary things. you give money to the states. the states have laid off 700,000 cops, firefighters, and teachers. you give money to states for couple years to rehire them. those kinds of things add up. by doing all this, you stimulate the economy. that means the private sector generates more jobs. it comes to about 7 million altogether. host: what do you consider fair share when it comes to wealthy taxpayers? guest: we propose two different things. numb
to reduce the deficit. unfortunately, rather than seriously considering the credible path that we have presented in our budget plan, some republicans have decided to play some games with the numbers, and they just are not telling the truth. instead of subtracting the sequestration replacement portion in the investment package from the $975 billion in total revenue, they're trying to say that you should somehow add them all together. they are taking one side of the ledger, combining it with the other side of the ledger and coming to some conclusion that makes absolutely no sense to us. mr. president, this would be like handing over $2 to buy a cup of coffee and having someone say, well the price was actually $2 plus the value of that coffee. it doesn't make any sense. and, by the way, you don't have to take my word for it. fact checkers and reporters have called this claim false and a step too far. and "the washington post" fact correcter even gave it two pinocchios. mr. president, i ask unanimous consent to insert in the record a story from "the washington post" on this inaccurate clai
at some of the people to solve the leadership deficit, chris christie, marco rubio, we have a cast of characters for the 2016 race that's different than the cast of characters in the 2012 race, so i think there's a little silver lining in that for republicans. >> let's listen to what jay carney had to say about the new republican report. >> the best way to increase support with the public for your party is to embrace policies to public supports. >> howard fineman, jay carney makes sense every once in a while. >> and he did right there. and this report from rnc read like a soviet five-year plan. we will have more production and we are going to reach out to the ethnic minorities that we don't understand. it had very little relationship to reality, except there was a distant sound of their realization that for example on gay rights, they're way, way wrong. hillary clinton today came out in favor of supporting gay marriage. young people in the rnc's own report, young people are the ones leading the way on that. i'll give reince priebus credit for saying in that report that the issue of
to the conservative rationale for budget can you tell us when conservatives get more honest about the debt and deficit. a conservative columnist says about the new ryan budget, it sacrificed seriousness for seriousness by promising to reach budgetary balance, not over the long term as budgets 1.0 and 2.0 did, but in a ten year window. this is not going to happen, and more importantly there's no reason why it needs to happen. modest deficits are perfectly compatible with fiscal responsibility. talk about singing a new tune. and the conservative think tank, the american enterprise institute asks why does the budget need to balance in ten years? debt reduction doesn't require balance, just that the economy is growing faster than the debt, while the plan does put the debt to gdp ratio on a downward trajectory, it probably doesn't need to be quite as steep. ezra klein, this is a big deal, and you're here on this show to prove it is a big deal. you would never come out this late if this wasn't a huge deal. >> absolutely not. >> this is huge. the debt is the reason we have to do all these terrible things to
and then on the deficit this year, the democrat deficit would be 164 billion dollars bigger than the republican deficit. and next year, 308 billion dollars, just to give you a sense of it, by 2015 the republican deficit would be down to 125 billion and the democrat deficit 433 billion. there's a big indication of the difference between the parties when you look at the budgets of the budget blueprints of the republicans in the house and the democrats in senate and republicans want to restrain spending and democrats want to continue to blow up the budget and eventually, over the decade add 1 trillion dollars of new taxes. >> sean: yeah, so 1 trillionew a trillion dollars, this is like they know no other way, all right? that's point one, but yet, they still will give us almost trillion dollar deficits as far as the eye can see throughout the entire ten-year period. here is the big issue though, i want to see obamacare repealed, but it's not going to happen through paul ryan's budget plan. the republicans, if they want that to happen, to get ryan's plan through, they're going to have to during one of the c
congressman paul ryan a budget. >> this budget more than just balanced. >> can we reduce our deficit and debt and still help those who are neediest in america. can we have a safety net that survives and still reduce the deficit? paul ryan says no. >> at least budgets are passing around here for a change. the government's going to have to learn to do more with less, it's not the government's money, it's the people's money. >> the senate democrats are considering a number of balances ever-- >> and house committee chair paul ryan telling us republicans and democrats are still world's apart. well, that is an understatement. we saw that just an hour ago. the democratic-led senate defeating the ryan house budget 40-59. so is there any hope left? here is congressman paul ryan. >> great to see you. >> great it to see you again. >> greta: i want to talk about the budget that passed today, i imagine you're happy. >> we're very happy. we passed a balanced budget and it's important we owe the country a reasonable plan and grows the economy. balancing the budget is not just a statistical exercise it's the
and bennett, the head of this new party on the right. it's unclear to me, i think you have a knowledge deficit that you didn't have the last time around. when you had someone with barak's experience, begin's experience, all these guys are gone. and the question is, does that mean the wheels, the brakes have come off the train? and that now it's more of a runaway car? or are you saying, no, not at all. livni might be there, and there'll be people who might not have the same amount of years of experience, but are maybe counterpoints to some of the other forces. so what's unclear to me yet is to what extent that forum that netanyahu relied upon, how central is that going to be? what is going to mean the loss of that knowledge, that deficit of experience? but i do think for the key factor, he definitely sees that his goal is that israel just be a normal western country, that the middle class have a better quality of life. sounds very familiar to people here. but he has said that the road to that is dealing with palestinian issue. not dividing jerusalem, but everything else. we've got to work this
% in three years and the deficit by force of $4 trillion and strengthen medicare and medicaid and you'd be asking the wealthy to pay their fair share. how do you get 7 million new jobs in one year in your budget? money onu are spending infrastructure. we have a $2.20 trillion in infrastructure deficit according to the american society of civil engineers three allows people to work on roads, bridges, etc.. you put people to work building schools and other necessary things. you give money to the states. states have laid off 700,000 cops and firefighters and teachers. by doing all this, you stimulate the economy by putting aggregate demand. what do you consider fair share when it comes to wealthy taxpayers? >> we propose to different things. we propose to close tax loopholes. - indid the our budget close many we will of the corporate tax loopholes. he sablan the profits home by taxing it at 3% -- you say bring them profits home by testing it at 3%. we say no. money here and through accounting tricks make it appear as if it is in the cayman islands. we will tax it all. but he should get a
here. the figures for february and that showed a $8.1 billion deficit and that's the eighth straight month of deficit. that's the trade balance figures for february for japan. let's have a look at the opening levels for the nikkei and the topix. let me just remind viewers that before we broke off the nikkei went through a pretty volatile twodays due to uncertainties over the bailout plan and it gained 247 points on tuesday as the yen resumed its weakening friend against the euro and the dollar. it's up again today. we pretty much wiped out the losses from monday. we're in the positive so far. >> what can you tell us about currency levels? where do we stand this morning? >> the yen resumes its weakening trend and the euro a big focus are now at the lower 4 y levels. 124.14 to 17. this banking issue overshadows. it's rebounded. traders really taking a bet it will have less of an impact than originally thought earlier this week. i'm talking about monday. investors will be looking to see european pmi data. let's bring up the dollar/yen. that's trading right at the upper 95 yen levels. fe
-- of both parties are opposed to the essential elements, entitlement reform and deficit reduction. >> but the difference between this grand bargine and the one two summers ago would be that you're in a world where the deficit might naturally be declining as well the would that make any difference? >> the problem is i don't think you can -- you still have to have revenue for this to be acceptable. ches -- i think it's clear that there won't be increased rates. that's not going to happen. so can this happen? can they tackle tax reform? >> you are also saying medicare costs are beginning to level off. they don't know why, but it's happening. for the first time in years, the democratic senate is actually considering a budget and that means there is possibly a good chance there is going to be a conference committee between the republican house and the democratic senate on the budget that could provide another opening of a bit of a window to again put some of the bigger ideas on the table the gwen: it's also possible that the sequestration, the word i hate to use, but the across the boa
reasonable. but if you unpack it, you find out that first of all, in this so-called billion dollar deficit, which of course is the press release deficit, it always changes later on. the actual amount of money this will cost, especially, if it's done correctly, which god forbid they've never done anything correctly before in terms of school closings. this will cost almost a billion dollars itself. so i don't believe any of this. rahm emanuel doesn't know the truth if it would slap him in the face. this is a military style campaign. school closings are based on closing military bases. it's also based on information coming from an unaccredited superintendent organization. but let me just say this -- in th they. >> they say these are poorly performing schools. they're not going to have to travel more than a mile to reach their new school. and any one traveling over an extra.8 of a mile will be bussed. so they're trying to -- >> you're also spending more money. and, again, they started out this conversation when they said they had to close schools by underutilization. they said we're not lookin
, and the senate thinks shouldsome revenue should be idea to tackle the deficit and invest in the middle class, not just simply cut tax rates for the rich. >> usually you can tax more and spend more and borrow more and that will somehow create growth and prosperity. i believe we have had four years of that experiment, which i fundamentally doubted and opposed from the beginning. and it hasn't worked. >> shepard: regardless of whether it's worked or hasn't, the insiders say the democratic budget will likely pass. mike emanuel is in washington. how has the vote been going and what's it like in there so far? reporter: we expect starting any moment they'll vote on a series of amendments between now and late night tonight. 25 to 40. summon hot-button issues including abortion, school choice, and bailouts. there are also arguments on budgetary matters. >> anyone wants to be taxed more than is necessary on either side of the aisle, but this enormous, enormous hubbub from the other side that says it's got a spending problem but refuses to look at the other side of the balance sheet, as a business guy,
decade. and $100 billion in stimulus spending. and would do little to cut spending or the deficit. four democrats mark pryor of arkansas, kay haigen of north carolina, mark baggich of alaska and max bachus of montana all up for reelection in november joined senate republicans who voted against it. even though the margin was close senate leaders were praising colleagues for a job well done. >> i know everyone is exhausted. and you may not feel it at the moment but this is one of the senate's finest days in recent years and i commend everyone who has participated in this extraordinary debate. >> first of all, over the last two decades the average budget resolution considered 78 amendments. we have done 101. average vote 37 amendments we have done twice as many. doing this has been herculean feat. >> harris: next the senate must reconcile the budget with a plan passed by republicans. now, context showing how differently the plans would deal with the economy. the senate plan calls for $46.5 trillion in spending, nearly $5 trillion more than the house plan and more revenue an additional $1 b
right now. then we address the long term budget deficit in a balanced way where we ask for shared responsibility as opposed to the republican plan which provides another tax break wind fall to very wealthy people at the end of everybody else. the expense of the middle class, the expense of commitments to seniors. so our focus right now is to number one, do no harm to the economy. number two, invest in a jobs plan that will help put people back to work. whether building roads or bridges or infrastructure or other things important to our economy. >> why will it take until 2040 to balance the budget under your plan? >> well, if you actually look at the past 40 years, we've only had four balanced budgets. those were during the clinton years and once leaning over to the bush years and then they squandered that balance. so the reason we do that is our focus is on jobs, craig. our focus is on meeting our commitments to seniors. we will not balance the budget on the backs of our kids' education or on the backs of our commitments to seniors. whether it is under medicare or medicaid. what w
introduce $20 billion in additional taxes this year and $40 billion in new taxes next year. so the deficit under the democratic senate budget proposal which only thing we've got at this point, calls for more spending and more taxes and bigger deficits. that is not where the american people are. recent polls this week showed that 55% of the american people favored the republican budget plan. if you took the word republican off of it and simply described would you support a budget that balances the budget and raises no taxes and cuts $5 trillion of them favor that 55% to 24% that budget that would raise taxes by a trillion and cut spending by hundred billion and not balance the budget which is what the democratic budget calls for. >> greta: we are 18 months out from the 2014 election. we have the house has passed a budget and senate has passed a budget. it will go to a conference for reconciliation. both parties have made it sent tral focus of 2014. it is a signal they are more interested in winning and making sorted smear each other's face with each other budget rather than drawing common g
trillion in new taxes. the government would still be in a deficit after ten years. senator patty murray argues the plan creates jobs and economic growth but, of course, during the process, patience did run thin. >> madam president, madam president, madam president. >> senate will come to order. >> madam president, the senate is not in order. i flow's a lot of march madness going on. we would like to keep it calm on the floor so that senators can be heard. >> reporter: the white house recently passed -- excuse me, the house recently passed the ryan budget plan which includes a $4.6 trillion deficit reduction over the next decade. these budget plans are resolutions are not bills. this week, congress did pass a continuing resolution bill which actually funds the government for the next six months. we did hear from white house press secretary jay carney, responding to today's news in a statement and reading, in part, "like the president's plan, the senate budget cuts wasteful spending, makes tough choices to strengthen entitlements and eliminates special tax breaks and loopholes for the wea
. we shouldn't run a deficit at least one that is as large now. i think it's precarious and for the senators, democratic senators running for reelection in red states. that is why you saw four democratic senators they are all representing states that barack obama lost. >> gregg: speaking of debt and deficits, president obama said recently the debt is not an immediate problem, but by huge margins, americans disagree. 68% of them disagree with the president on that. they also think he is wrong with b something else. spending. this is a fox news poll. they think his top priority should be cutting spending to reduce the deficit, not spend more, taxpayer dollars to create jobs. is that why president obama seemed to have dropped the campaign for spending realize he is pushing his job ratings down and in the process driving away potential voters? >> i think there has been a sense over the last month or so, as you point out poll numbers have gone down. white house is not going to make a big campaigns go across the country asking for tax increases but that is also because they ar
the deficits, although george w. bush never balanced a budget in eight years but of course these were freedom deficits. of a the credit card with no limit presidency of mr. bush, the credit card bill has arrived in your mailbox. it's called austerity. last decade, we had two wars off the books while cutting taxes for the wealthy. there are ways to fix our deficit, but don't hurt the poor and middle class a carbon tax creating capital gains and income. apparently we don't really hate
and millions of americans who say that the economy is the main issue. second to the economy is the deficit. it goats back to the fundamental issue of moderation. this is the achilles' heel for the republican party. everything is just black and white. whereas most folks, most americans in the middle believe in moderation. whether we do our own taxes or finances, we sit down and figure out, how do we cut a little here, save alternates there, increase revenue? so the problem with the republican party is they're out of step how most of us work on a day-to-day basis. that's something that the president has been so good at reflecting in his bigger vision of deficit reduction and the economy as a bigger issue. >>> clarence, you still here boehner say no new ref, though the american people are saying new revenue. they're saying we don't have an immediate crisis, but we need immediate cuts. why are we cutting head start and other things immediately if there's no immediate problem. a new republican leaning poll, a republican-leaning poll says just 16% of americans said the deficit and the debt with
and deficit. i voted against the solution for the fiscal cliff because the headlines would say the fiscal cliff is avoided, and there were three elements. we did not avoid any of them. we raise taxes on every american. we put sequestration down the road and we did zero on deficit problems. we are facing total economic chaos if we are not careful. host: republican caller. pennsylvania. caller: in response to the fiscal cliff, i find him very -- i do not know, i do not believe what he is saying. he is talking about a fiscal cliff, but you want us to accept the people here illegally and give them something they have not earned. i do not understand what republicans are doing. i am a conservative. i do not want amnesty. i do not want them here. host: you might have missed what the congressman said earlier. i will let him respond. guest: what she is saying is she does not want amnesty, and under president bush he had a strong amnesty plan and i said i would not back it. total amnesty like the one president reagan did will cause a lot of problems here and i think we need the workers. obviously,
need to do it in a way that both stabilizes our deficit and debt, makes critical investments in growing our economy and preserves the core of the programs on which americans rely. this is not just about numbers. it is also about values. it is also about priorities. >> sreenivasan: republican jeff sessions of alabamaĆ§Ć³ called democrats out for how they were using the word balance during the debate. >> they're also using the word balance. they hope people will hear it and think that this means they have a balanced budget. they know they don't have a balanced budget. they won't tell the american people they don't have one. they just use the word. but it's not in their document. >> sreenivasan: sessions forced a vote on an amendment to put democrats on record in opposition to balancing the budget by the end of the decade. it failed on a near-party line vote. lawmakers in north dakota moved to outlaw abortion today. the republican-controlled legislature passed a bill defining life as starting at conception. it is one in a series of anti- abortion measures that have passed this year. the bi
down, if i may say. so we are going to have a deficit this year of a trillion 300 billion dollars which is $25 billion a week. it's the worst deficit that we've had, and nobody knows. >> social security is easy to fix. you lift the cap right now if >>> predictions. pat. >> immigration reform passes the house. republicans kill it in the senate. >> eleanor. >>next state to legalize gay marriage. >> what state? >> illinois. >> susan. >> immigration reform is going to run into big trouble in congress. >> really. mort. >> what i think the economy is going to remain >>> i predict that president abi of japan trying to revitalize his economy by loosening its grip on inflation will overshoot. he will go into debt, it will go into debt
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 207 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)